Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive


Forgot your password?

'Stargate: SG-1' Cancelled 605

Ant writes "The Sci-Fi channel has announced that it will not be renewing its (very popular) original series Stargate SG-1 for another season.The spinoff series Stargate: Atlantis will get the nod, though, airing for a fourth year. SG-1 aired its 200th episode on August 18th, and the SF series is the longest-running SF show on American television." Gateworld has further details: "New episodes of both Stargate SG-1 and Stargate Atlantis continue Fridays this summer starting at 9 p.m. Eastern/Pacific, leading up to the mid-season finale on September 22. The second half of the season will begin in March, leading to SG-1's final bow on SCI FI in June."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

'Stargate: SG-1' Cancelled

Comments Filter:
  • Re:nudity (Score:5, Informative)

    by Marillion ( 33728 ) <ericbardes AT gmail DOT com> on Tuesday August 22, 2006 @09:29AM (#15954841)
    In the pilot episode (originally on Showtime), Jackson's offworld girlfriend was naked when turned into a Go'uld.
  • Re:nudity (Score:2, Informative)

    by brap999 ( 778802 ) on Tuesday August 22, 2006 @09:32AM (#15954859) Homepage
    I should have mentioned it was the CNN article that mentioned the forced nudity from Showtime n.stargate.reut/index.html []
  • Re:It's just like... (Score:5, Informative)

    by sammy baby ( 14909 ) on Tuesday August 22, 2006 @09:46AM (#15954948) Journal
    Nice try. Anyone who remembers "Crackers Dont' Matter []" is obviously a die-hard fan. ;)
  • Apparently it's true (Score:3, Informative)

    by sammy baby ( 14909 ) on Tuesday August 22, 2006 @09:53AM (#15954996) Journal
    I don't remember seeing anything particularly naughty, but courtesy of the Hollywood Reporter []...

    Anderson's humor served him well during the show's first season, which even Wright and executive producer Robert Cooper, who came onboard as a writer, admit got off to a shaky start. There were rocky story lines, and there was cringe-worthy dialogue. And there was a creative argument with Showtime.

    Wright still bristles at remembering how the channel wanted full-frontal nudity. "People said, 'It's Showtime sci-fi -- that's what fans want,'" he says. "We got lambasted by the critics for it. Here was this fun 'Star Wars'-like show with flashes of naked women."...

    But the following year, Showtime decided not to renew the series. Explains Cohen: "Showtime decided they wanted fresh programming despite the fact that 'Stargate' was popular and performing well. We were determined to find it a new home."

    Nevertheless, Wright and Cooper prepared for the show's demise. "I said to MGM, 'Let's have a spinoff show ready to launch, which would fall on the heels of a feature film,'" Wright says.

    Enter Sci Fi Channel, a natural fit for the series (no full-frontal nudity required). "The show hits squarely with our fan base," executive vp original programming Mark Stern says.

    Maybe the DVDs they released were sanitized?
  • The show will go on (Score:5, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 22, 2006 @09:53AM (#15954998) i_will_go_on.shtml []
    Cooper: SG-1 will go on

    Monday - August 21, 2006 | by Darren Sumner

    Don't count Stargate SG-1 out just yet. Though SCI FI Channel has cancelled the long-running series (story), the show's producers are hard at work looking for a new outlet for the story to continue, executive producer Robert C. Cooper told GateWorld exclusively.

    "As far as the future I can't comment yet because nothing has been confirmed," Cooper said. "What we want to emphasize is that the franchise is not dying. SG-1 will go on in some way. We're just not ready to announce how."

    A formal announcement from the studio and the network is expected later this week.

    Cooper also emphasizes that, though emotions are running high among Stargate fans who have just learned the news, it is important to keep the show's ratings strong throughout the remainder of its run on SCI FI. "What's most important is that fans don't take out their frustration with SCI FI by not watching," he said. "In fact, what they need to do is watch both SG-1 and Atlantis LIVE and make sure the ratings stay strong.

    "That helps prove to other outlets that might be interested in SG-1 that the show is still as strong as we think it is."

    Could Stargate SG-1 find its way to yet another network in 2007? Or might the SG-1 team be headed for a TV movie, mini-series, direct-to-video feature ... or the big screen? Stay with GateWorld for the latest developments.
  • What a shame (Score:4, Informative)

    by Pedrito ( 94783 ) on Tuesday August 22, 2006 @09:54AM (#15955002)
    Starting in Season 8, SG-1 really started to go downhill, but I really felt like they were starting to put it back together this season and I was really starting to enjoy it again. When Browder first came onboard, I really felt like that was the end, but I've started liking him and I think the show has really returned to the kind of stories that make it great.

    Whether it continues or not, it has been an excellent series and will, for a while at least, have its place as, I believe, the second longest consecutive running sci-fi series in history. It's going to be hard for anyone to beat the original Dr. Who's 26 consecutive seasons, and obviously that isn't going to happen soon. I was kind of hoping SG-1 might give it a run for its money, though.

    The creators, writers, and actors who have been involved, old and new, all deserve congratulations for really fine work.
  • by MustardMan ( 52102 ) on Tuesday August 22, 2006 @10:02AM (#15955064)
    I can only recall one time where there was full frontal nudity - in the pilot episode, where daniel's woman gets turned into a snakehead. This was on the season 1 DVD
  • by kria ( 126207 ) <> on Tuesday August 22, 2006 @10:12AM (#15955147) Journal
    IMHO, the first seven seasons of SG-1 are worth it, particularly the first four. Once you've gotten through one, though, you can decide about the rest yourself. :) Eight was the season where Richard Dean Anderson had a reduced presence. Season nine and this one are mostly horrible.

    Atlantis started off a little weak it's first season, but it was very good by the end of it. The second season wasn't quite as good, but I think the currently airing third season is decent.

    And, for comparison, I, too, am a huge Firefly fan. I would say that my favorite Sci-fi channel show, though, is Battlestar Galactica, and there should be enough time to catch up before Season Three starts in October. If there isn't, I've heard that they are doing a one hour summary show sometime.
  • by A beautiful mind ( 821714 ) on Tuesday August 22, 2006 @10:14AM (#15955165)
    ...spend my 1000th post on.

    I'm dedicating it to the creators of Stargate SG-1.

    I won't repeat people saying that it was time, etc, but they are right. Instead, I'd just like to say that it was great entertainment. The occasional technobabble part was perfectly balanced out by the show not taking itself too seriously.

    So, thanks for the great show!
  • Cancel Atlantis, too (Score:1, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 22, 2006 @10:15AM (#15955171)
    They need to cancel both of them since the average Atlantis script is simply a crappy copy of a previous SG1 episode.
  • by MustardMan ( 52102 ) on Tuesday August 22, 2006 @10:24AM (#15955242)
    It's funny you should mention the audience thing. I just saw a TV ad for dragoncon last night, and they mentioned one of the attractions of the event being professional wrestling. That struck me as kind of odd, but I guess sci-fi and wrasslin' both somewhat cater to young adult demographics, so maybe it's not that crazy after all.
  • Paging Dr Jackson (Score:5, Informative)

    by Nastard ( 124180 ) on Tuesday August 22, 2006 @10:32AM (#15955288)
    This may have been mentioned before, but there's been some talk in interviews and whatnot that Shanks might leave SG-1 anyway to join the Atlantis cast (where, logically, he belongs anyway). Jackson is my favorite, and this would at least give me some hope for Atlantis.
  • by wo1verin3 ( 473094 ) on Tuesday August 22, 2006 @11:43AM (#15955870) Homepage
    >>I'd rather them finish the Ori story reasonably quickly and
    >>end the show on a moderately high note

    Unlikely that this will occur :( i_will_go_on.shtml []

    Don't count Stargate SG-1 out just yet. Though SCI FI Channel has cancelled the long-running series, the show's producers are hard at work looking for a new outlet for the story to continue, executive producer Robert C. Cooper told GateWorld exclusively.

    The only thing I hate more then series I like being cancelled, is being left hanging, possibly indefinately.
  • by rkhalloran ( 136467 ) on Tuesday August 22, 2006 @11:48AM (#15955913) Homepage
    I think some of us are a little too US-centric here: The Doctor [] has been around far longer ('63-'89, '05-present)
  • Re:It's just like... (Score:3, Informative)

    by Fordiman ( 689627 ) <fordiman@ g m a i l . com> on Tuesday August 22, 2006 @12:01PM (#15956026) Homepage Journal
    I think it was seeing Kryten being the cold, military one, and Vala being the somewhat flippant one.

    It confuses the mivonks outta me.
  • by bigbigbison ( 104532 ) on Tuesday August 22, 2006 @12:51PM (#15956434) Homepage
    And when the ECW fans heard it was coming back but on SciFi they thgouth WTF is this doing on this shitty channel? And fans STILL wonder.
    As it turns out WWE, who owns ECW has a deal to show them main show Raw on the USA netowork which NBC now owns. So WWE wanted to bring back ECW. NBC wanted to show it but they didn't want to put it on USA or Bravo, so SciFi was all that was left.
    That's the logic of corporations for you.
    Apparently, its debut was the highest ratings SciFi ever had.
    I'm a wrestling fan and a scifi fan, and it still doesn't make any sense. The random shit SciFi is asking them to put in like zombies and vampires to try to make some sort of sense aren't appealing to SciFi fans and are just irritating to wrestling fans.
  • by bigbigbison ( 104532 ) on Tuesday August 22, 2006 @12:57PM (#15956498) Homepage
    ECW was forced on SciFi by NBC who now owns SciFI (ok technically NBC-Universal) WWE (who owns ECW) is on NBC owned USA network and when WWE wanted to bring back ECW NBC wanted to air it and shoved it on SciFi. Neither wrestling fans or SciFi fans can understand the logic of that.
  • Re:It's just like... (Score:3, Informative)

    by Babbster ( 107076 ) <> on Tuesday August 22, 2006 @01:32PM (#15956800) Homepage
    Dean Devlin, who wrote the original Stargate movie, still wants to do sequels to the original movie [] with Kurt Russell and James Spader reprising their roles (as opposed to Richard Dean Anderson and Michael Shanks who took over the O'Neill and Jackson characters for the TV series).
  • by Belial6 ( 794905 ) on Tuesday August 22, 2006 @03:12PM (#15957557)
    Not from my search []. The current Wier is Torri Higginson []. The original was Jessica Steen [].

    Just look at the pictures of the two women. They look nothing alike. Steen was believable as someone involved with high end government work. Higgins is not.
  • by mcspoo ( 933106 ) on Tuesday August 22, 2006 @03:18PM (#15957600) Homepage
    It's actually tied to the fact that Sci Fi and USA Network have the same parent (NBC). USA airs the WWE programming. WWE runs ECW. They needed air time to air the "new" ECW, and the only time period available for the summer season was on Sci Fi. ECW ratings have been so high, the deal was extended beyond the summer season. Supposedly, they're looking to move ECW up to USA sooner or later to avoid these questions.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 22, 2006 @04:16PM (#15958003)
    Longest running *NORTH AMERICAN* scifi show. The good doctor is British, no?
  • by danbeck ( 5706 ) on Tuesday August 22, 2006 @05:05PM (#15958369)
    I agree, if you want to see a "strong female lead" just look to the Lost City incarnation of Dr. Weir. Her character was well acted, strong, sure of herself and unwilling to compromise in the things she believed in.

    The person who replied to my original post is such the stereotypical liberal bigot. That type of person unknowingly fosters and pushes forward the idiotic stereotypes that make people think the current Dr. Weir is a strong lead, when in truth, she's nothing but a bumbling, bitchy leader.

The optimum committee has no members. -- Norman Augustine